On RROD, 3yr Warrenty from purchase was only extended to a very few. I know this for a fact because MS issued notices to gamestop about us to stop telling people that it was, and that it was for from launch. It was a case by case basis for those who got it from purchase.

Timed Exclusivity and Multiplatform's mythical access to way more money is a complete farce. Ask Namco how doing timed/partial exclusivity vs full exclusivity worked out for them with Tales. Multiplatformness is a propagated myth of success. It has caused more IPs to make less than those it has encouraged exponential sales growth. Fact of the matter is, if you have a well known IP already that has been exclusive for years, making it multiplat is just a drain on funds for your game to sell just about the same(or often times less). Dark Souls is a recent tragedy of this(it didn't sell poorly, just not gangbusters which the myth of MP says it should have).

I understand how you might not have needed Wifi, but a sizable amount did. Towards the middle of this gen, Gamestop would get floods of people trying to connect via Wifi, not realizing that required a seperate attachement. Even if the Wifi is not your thing, you must admit the controller was a glaring ommision.

XboxLive USED to have the best services, almost just as many ppl have Plus now as Live from what I've been reading, also more people are buying things from PSN than ever, the contrast is that MS pushes the individual title here and there far better and they go on to sell tons.

Lamao, there is no way silver offers more than normal psn, i can not accept that, not even as an opinion!

hey OP, if by your own admission you don't understand... which after reading through your fanboy post I can clearly see why, than I'd love to hear you explain the reason you've taken so much time and effort constructing this bitter, little short story telling us all about it
Check this out..... we get it, you don't like Xbox or MS, but you love the skittles outta your PS3. We get it. Thanks for letting us know. Long live the mighty PS3.. blah, blah, blah.. death to all things Xbox.. blah, blah, blah.. I'm allowed to like what I want but I plan on whining and complaining if you like something different...blah, blah, blah.
I'm intolerant!
Look, the only thing it appears you don't understand is how pathetically unoriginal, boring, and pointless these silly fanboy threads have become after seven years.
Good god man, grow up... let it go.
And just to be fair, I can't understand why you'd want an overpriced xbox 360 knock-off just so you can watch blu-ray movies, play a handful of AAA exclusives, enjoy an aggravatingly disorganized and laggy online network for multiplayer games.... albeit a free network. Or why you'd proclaim loyalty to a gaming company that's only had 1 original idea for nearly two decades. Wait a minute, to be honest, Sony weren't the first ones to release a CD-based machine were they, so my mistake, make that 0 original ideas in nearly the past two decades.
Say what you want about Microsoft, but they've changed they way we interact with each other in games, they've changed what we consider to be a gaming console, what its limitations are. Like Nintendo, they innovate, introduce new ideas .. not just follow along behind the lead dog.
Whatever... no matter which company or deck you choose, there's more than enough room for competition, except in the small minded people like yourself that love to hate what they won't like.

Ok. Do tell of these offers tho. I just hear a lot of Live being better but no actual evidence of the such, and the only thing ever toted is that infernal XGC. If there is some other identifier, I honestly would like to know.

PSN gives small and big games away for free pretty much  every month. I just downloaded Vanquish for free yesterday.

added a disclaimer to the OP

"Disclaimer: As you all already know, Yes I am a big Sony fan. I don't think this invalidates me from asking a reasonable question though. you should understand that this is obviously a person looking over from one side of the fence and the impression I get from what I see. The whole reason of asking this is that maybe there is a quirk or facet to them that I am not seeing and would like to understand where it derives from."

everyone happy?

Just trying to understand what I am missing, if any, with an answer deeper than "Opinions are different"

well to be fair sony did have an idea to sell hardware at a loss to squeeze the smaller guy.  it worked until they ran in to a bigger fish willing to under cut them on price for similar hardware.  

they also showed everyone how to moneyhat timed 3rd party exclusives. look at their big holiday lineup for 1995s ps1 launch, all 3rd party...battle arena toshinden wipeout destruction derby...all made it to sega saturn 6 months to a year later.

Sorry but your assertion about 360 warranty is just false. It was a manufacturer warranty, you just called MS. Please correct yourself.

As for your observation on sales, have you looked at the actual charts this vgchartz site holds? Dark Souls significantly sold more just by being multiplat. Which is obvious business sense: bigger market = more sales. Nobody's in this business to lose money.

I'm glad I didn't pay $599 for a ton of features i don't require. At the time, it would still have been cheaper to buy an Xbox 360 with rechargable batteries, wifi and all the mod-cons and it would have still been cheaper, so I don't know who you're implying was suckered here. As for disingenuous behaviour, those who purchased the fat PS3 have had the otheros feature removed; an unprecedented move by any vendor, and also had the workaround for frankly cruddy patching system hidden behind a paywall.

PSN has been playing catchup to XBox live all gen, and yet still it lacks functions that I take for granted.

You get PS+, you get freemium content.  You get access to things.  With the likes of PSN and normal, you get far less demos.  I have had both systems, and about everything on the 360 gets demos.  That is not true for the PSN.  It is because they do things differently and have a different business model.  For me, I get more with XBox Live.  Home is nice, but pretty barren as it is.  Free Realms is kinda cool though.  The fact I have had a lot more content between the 360 and PS3, is why I went with the 360 over it.  

And yes, Vanquish isn't really free, it is FREENIUM, which means you get it with PS+.  What I speak about is free vs free between two networks.  If you don't play  online then XBox Silver is better than regular PSN, due to the amount of content you access FOR NO SUBSCRIPTION COSTS.

And I did check here, and yes, you have PS+:

http://blog.us.playstation.com/2013/02/18/playstation-plus-update-vanquish-joins-instant-game-collection/

As for what I don't get it is Sony partisans screaming how much of a rip off XBox Live Gold is, and then when Sony offers its own next tier, they go all gaga how they are now paying money for free content.  Next up, if the PS4 ends up charging for online play with say something like Playstation World, you will end you hearing the same partisans talk about how it isn't bad to pay for online play after all, because "you have to pay for the network".

LMAO

Sony has stated time and again, that they never paid for outright exclusivity. Beleive it or not, some business deals can be made without the exchanging of funds to persuade opinion. Sony simply talked a better game. Whether they do now is another question, as MS's raising of this standard might have forced their hand. The fact they refused to do so was part of their downfall this gen, remember?